like just take a chunk of umbilical chord
2006-11-02 07:46:24 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
Sure would, if the "Good Men" that fathered babies, would care for them, stay in there lives, and provide a good life, for there babies.
2006-11-03 04:45:40 · answer #1 · answered by cheztom1 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think all the extra work seems a bit unnecassary, and the gov already has my fingerprints and vital statistics on record. Now they'd want my dna jeesh... they prob do already have it on file somewhere...
Though I think the extra work would tie up the lab, and staff so they wouldn't be able to save any lives or anything like that. Otherwise it's an absolutely wonderful Idea.
Those umbillical cords go to Stem cell research, well not all, but we got to find a cure for M.J.F. so he can film back to the future 4
2006-11-02 23:53:10 · answer #2 · answered by Grev 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've thought for years that this would solve a lot of problems. There are so many good men out there paying child support for children that aren't theirs. This would also identify women who are sleeping around on their husbands and maybe solve years of heartache (sometimes the husbands don't find out until years later). Also, it would help because some women don't identify their child's father after birth, and therefore can go on state welfare. After all, how can the father pay child support if no one knows who he is. If the child is DNA identified, the child would not be on welfare. I would definitely support a program which made DNA analysis a requirement at birth !! Oh, and why can't insurance companies be billed for this procedure, like all other procedures?
2006-11-02 15:59:03 · answer #3 · answered by Memphis qt 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
i support it but you don't ned a chunk of cord. DNA testing is done by swabbing the inside of the cheek with a q tip type thing. no needles no chunks of anything except some spit and skin cells from inside the mouth. Also, even if the father admits paternity, they sometimes still have to go through testing for child support reasons. I just went through this with my 10 year old and his dad has been his dad since birth but required testing anyway to prove it. If it had been done at birth my son would not have to remember the incident and have the strange feelings he had because of it.
2006-11-02 15:48:51 · answer #4 · answered by L.J. 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, this way the man can know as soon as the baby is born whether or not to put his name on the birth certificate. Too many women cheat and then lie to their husbands/boyfriends, then the poor guy ends up stuck supporting a child that is not his if they break up.
2006-11-03 13:09:57 · answer #5 · answered by innocence faded 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes i would. i think its a great idea. we have way to much baby mama drama going on. i also think that any unwed mother should not be allowed any kind of a.f.d.c. or food stamps or any goverment support. i have 6 children and 9 grand children and I'm tired of supporting all these stupid women's children while there drawing a boat load of welfare. if your unwed and pregnant then that's on you not us tax payers. 80% of women drawing all this free money claim they can not find the fathers to make them pay while the truth is the fathers are either living in the same house or know where the father is. they know they can get more welfare money then the courts would order them in child support. i not only raised my children but supported them also. not one time did i ever expect much less ask my fellow tax payers for any help.
2006-11-02 16:16:06 · answer #6 · answered by BLOODHOUND 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well just to show not all women are treacherous... I'm divorced with one child and her father has never paid me child support in the 16 years of me doing it alone. I have never gone after him for even a penny and feel that I shouldn't have to make someone be part of the most important creation of their life. I do it alone and never ***** or complain about it some of us have pride and self respect and ethics and decide to not take the easy way out and burn somebody else for our responsibilities.
2006-11-03 05:24:30 · answer #7 · answered by Y 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only if the men are then legally tied to the baby, for the child's ENTIRE life, just as the mother is.
That would be the only fair way to keep all of the immature, no-account men from running away from their responsibilities!
2006-11-02 15:55:51 · answer #8 · answered by abfabmom1 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think that would be a great idea. I'm sure lots of people would not agree. This would take the doubt out of it for lots of unmarried couples. Heck, even married couples.
2006-11-02 15:49:23 · answer #9 · answered by Chris C 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That would make it a lot easier to weed out the undesireables.
All hail King Bush!
2006-11-03 10:13:01 · answer #10 · answered by Fire_God_69 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋